Category: General

TxDOT's power grab in El Paso pits City Council against County and MPO

Posted on by

Link to artice in El Paso Timeshere.

In another desperate power grab, TxDOT continues its totalitarian regime by trying to bypass El Paso’s MPO and circumvent the law to force that region to open an Regional Mobility Authority (RMA, or tolling authority definition here). Their MPO, State Representative Joe Pickett, County Judge-elect, and, most importantly, the PEOPLE of El Paso overwhelmingly oppose toll roads, yet TxDOT bullies, threatens, and manipulates elected officials who are heeding the will of the people in order to railroad their own profit-driven agenda. TxDOT does not have the authority in the law, HB 3588, to approve a city council petition for an RMA. It’s supposed to go through counties. This is a power grab to circumvent the law.

Note the blueprint TxDOT uses to push their tax grab…get yourself an area “mobility coalition” (we affectionately refer to ours, the San Antonio Mobility Coalition, Joe Krier’s outfit, as taxpayer funded lobbyists who are a front for the private road building lobby they represent). And it’s the same ol’ talking points: toll it or you don’t get your projects until 2030. Apparently it matters not whether you live in El Paso, San Antonio, or Austin, the answer from TxDOT is always the same…it’s toll it or NO project has funding until 2030. What’s the magic behind 2030 anyway? Nothing, other than it sounds a long ways off. It’s a scare tactic and their arguments don’t hold water. You can’t convince the public that every project in every city around the state has insufficient funding for the next 20+ years. It begs the question, what are they doing with their $7.5 billion budget if suddenly they’re declaring no project has enough funding until 2030?

County group to fight regional mobility board
By Ramon Bracamontes
July 27, 2006
El Paso Times

El Paso, TX – While City Council is proceeding with plans to appoint a transportation authority that has the power to build toll roads and issue bonds for highway projects, a separate countywide board of elected officials is working to derail that process.

This fight will continue today and Friday at two separate meetings.

The Texas Transportation Commission, which approves every highway construction project in the state, will conduct its monthly meeting today in El Paso. This commission, which has El Pasoan Ted Houghton as a member, authorized City Council last month to establish a regional mobile authority, or RMA. The RMA would have power to build roads more quickly because it could use tolls and bonds to pay for projects.

At today’s meeting, supporters of the city’s RMA are expected to attend to talk about El Paso’s highway needs. Others are also expected to present.

Then on Friday, when El Paso’s Metropolitan Planning Organization, or MPO meets, the elected officials sitting on that board will be asked to vote on a motion to denounce the need for an RMA.

MPO members will be asked to approve a highway construction plan that is different from what the RMA is pursuing and uses standard funding, which means no toll roads, no bonds.

The MPO consists of city and county elected officials, as well as elected officials from Southern New Mexico, Sunland Park, Vinton, Anthony, Horizon City, Clint and Socorro.

The MPO already voted once before to oppose an RMA. When the transportation commissioners approved the El Paso RMA, they told city officials that it would be best if the MPO supported the RMA.

The final commission order approving the RMA does not include that stipulation.

The only stipulation in the order is that all RMA projects must also be included on the MPO project list. That means what the MPO does will affect the future of the RMA.

And what the MPO does Friday will also affect the completion of Loop 375. In its request, city officials said the first highway to be built by the RMA would be the Southern Relief Route, which expands the Border Highway from Downtown to the West Side somewhere on Paisano.

City officials and Texas Department of Transportation officials have said this Southern Relief Route, which is a part of the region’s plan to connect the Border Highway to Paisano Drive, will cost more than $400 million and is the continuation of Loop 375 to the West Side.

To speed up construction of this road, the city and TxDOT are pursuing the RMA.

However, state Rep. Joe Pickett, D-El Paso, will ask the MPO to approve a plan that builds this Southern Relief Route for less than $200 million and without tolls.

“We can build four highways with the money needed to build one toll road,” Pickett said. “If you don’t put toll lanes on the road, the cost goes down.”

Pickett said he will continue to work against toll roads and the establishment of an RMA because he said El Paso can keep building roads without toll roads and the money is there to make it happen.

Details of his plan will not be revealed until Friday.

City Rep. Steve Ortega said the city is moving forward with the appointment of an RMA. The city will appoint six members and the governor will appoint the chair. Nominations are currently being solicited.

“The RMA is needed so that we can provide transportation infrastructure, that is much needed, in a manner that is timely and efficient,” Ortega said. “With an RMA, we can complete the Southern Relief Route in a couple of years; without it, the route will not be done until 2030.”

Anthony Cobos, the El Paso County Judge-elect who takes office in January, said he is opposed to the RMA and toll roads because more roads are needed right now. He sat on the MPO for two years, so he is familiar with the issue, he said.

“I don’t think we’ve had adequate public comment and a year ago, the public was very much against toll roads and an RMA,” Cobos said.

According to the El Paso Times/KVIA ABC 7 Poll done in February, 59 percent of El Pasoans oppose toll roads as a way to pay for expensive transportation projects while 38 percent favor them. That is the same percentage of opposition as in the Times’ 2004 poll.

Chuck Berry, the TxDOT district engineer in El Paso, said the establishment of the RMA gives the region more tools from which to draw money for projects.

“This gives us access to funding that is not otherwise available to us,” Berry said.

Among those scheduled to speak at today’s transportation commission meeting is El Paso businessman John Broaddus. He is the co-chair of the steering committee that formed the new Borderland Mobility Coalition. The coalition is an advocacy group that will seek funding and support to build up the region’s transportation needs.

“We, as a region, need to come together with one single message about what we need,” Broaddus said. “That has not happened before.

More than 450 turn out to OPPOSE tolls on Bandera!

Posted on by

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

RMA’s meeting “tactics” don’t fool the public
San Antonio, TX, July 27, 2006 – In a massive show of opposition to toll roads, more than 400 concerned citizens filled the auditorium at Marshall High School in Leon Valley. It was the first public meeting hosted by the Alamo Regional Mobility Authority (ARMA) and the first meeting for the Bandera Road Toll project. The ARMA called their “work group” public meeting format “new,” but it’s really an old tactic to try to bore or anesthetize the public on an issue about which the public is clearly hostile.“They expect hundreds of people to sit through hours of presentations and ‘work sessions’ before they ever to have the opportunity to actually get their comments on the record. It’s offensive and an insult to people’s time. They love to claim paying tolls will save you time, well, why don’t they save us time and just give us the mic,” says Terri Hall, Regional Director of San Antonio Toll Party.com.

After starting the meeting late and after a lengthy opening presentation, the moderator then had attendees break-up into work sessions to discuss ideas, alternatives, etc. for another 20 minutes. Then the public had to endure RJ Rivera and Associates “sharing” a summary of attendees’ thoughts rather than actually letting the public tell it themselves. By the time the public comment portion commenced, a full two hours had passed! A good half of the crowd of concerned citizens left midway through the meeting disgusted at the lack of consideration for folks’ time…but not before hundreds signed our petition to stop the toll roads, to make donations, and to sign-up to volunteer.

“This dog & pony show approach was designed to fatigue the public into submission, numbing the people with a 30 minute presentation and then work groups in order to peel them off in frustration. By the time the public comment portion came, it was a half-empty room! When you strip all the double talk out, it’s a hocus pocus show to cram something down the public’s throat without their consent,” notes Hall.

However, it back-fired. Many folks complained of the format, including State Representative David Leibowitz, and one called it a “sham” when they finally got their turn at the microphone.

“The public could see precisely what the RMA was trying to do, and that was to divide and conquer the opposition. They knew the turn out would be enormous and their mission was to break people up, wear folks down, and waste their time,” relates Hall. “When public comments come last, it was obvious to everyone what was happening. And, of course, they knew the media wouldn’t stick around to report on the litany of opposition.”

Once the public finally got to speak, there were still a good 200 people left in the room and many mentioned the need to vote out ALL politicians who support tolls or who voted to toll our roads, particularly Governor Perry. Some spoke to how there’s an awakening among the grassroots–that it’s time to take our government back. Several fantastic solutions were proposed including loud applause for and frequent reference to improved, expanded public transit options. There was actually a good portion of the audience that supported doing nothing. One hundred percent of the public comments were opposed to the tolls with the exception of Vic Boyer of the San Antonio Mobility Coalition (a lobby group on behalf of the highway special interests) who is ardently in favor of tolls.

The meeting finally ended at 10 PM!

This is a complete departure from the glory days of the Texas Department of Transportation. “They have descended into a process devoid of accountability to the public, using secret deals for the benefit of multi-national special interests, and for all intents and purposes are selling off Texas to the highest bidder, which is a far cry from providing safe, reliable, affordable transportation for all Texans,” observes a disappointed Hall.

-30-

Calls for drilling off Florida in effort to reduce soaring fuel costs

Posted on by

Link to article here.

The U.S. is falling behind China in shoring up the world’s oil supply. We’re going to need Florida’s oil a lot more to come close to meeting demand and before we can reduce our dependence on foreign oil. Alan Greenspan said to get busy on developing more affordable alternative fuels since gas prices are hurting our economy, so let’s get busy!

Cuba oil probe spurs calls for U.S. drilling

By Patrice Hill
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
July 26, 2006

Congressional proponents of oil and gas drilling are pointing to Cuba’s exploration off the coast of Florida — with help from China — as a prime reason to open up U.S. drilling in the eastern Gulf of Mexico.
But Florida legislators continue to resist, and some of them are trying to stop Cuba’s activities by pushing to rescind a 1977 treaty dividing the Straits of Florida halfway between the two countries.
The Bush administration, with an eye toward the pivotal role Florida has played in presidential politics and out of solidarity with President Bush’s brother, Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, has largely sided with Florida in the dispute. It supports only very limited drilling off the coast of Florida, as would be permitted under a bill pending in the Senate.
“American politics today — it is the no-drill zone,” said Sen. Larry E. Craig, Idaho Republican.
“We sit here watching China exploit a valuable resource within eyesight of the U.S. coast,” he said, noting that one 2005 U.S. Geological Survey estimated the North Cuba Basin may contain as much oil as the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve in Alaska.
“I am certain the American public would be shocked, as this country is trying to reduce our dependency on Middle East oil, that countries like China are realizing this energy resource,” Mr. Craig said.
“This is a pocketbook issue, not a political issue. Whole regions of the Gulf are not available for drilling today,” said Sen. Jeff Sessions, Alabama Republican, who has sought to find ways to expand exploration in the Gulf of Mexico.
“What is happening? Fidel Castro in Cuba is partnering with China and is moving forward. … He can drill, but we cannot. He can take the money and fund his adventures around South and Central America. … Is that what people would like to see?”
Congressional policies since the 1970s have fostered fuel consumption, he said, but at the same time prohibit further drilling domestically for the sake of the environment.
The result has been growing dependence on oil imports, which now provide more than half the fuel Americans use, although legislators routinely denounce the nation’s reliance on “foreign oil” when they renew the ban on domestic drilling.
The Senate this week is expected to try one more time to break the impasse over drilling in the eastern Gulf with a bill that would open up a key tract to exploration but provide a 125-mile no-drilling buffer zone for Florida.
News last winter that Cuba has hopes of finding commercially viable reserves of oil in the Straits of Florida helped to nudge Florida’s senators toward endorsing the Senate bill after years of opposing any drilling at all, congressional aides said. But Florida legislators in Congress continue to oppose any broad new exploration activities in state waters.
Mr. Craig said drilling advocates sought to alert Congress this spring to Cuba’s activities. But rather than reconsider the U.S. drilling ban, he said, drilling opponents dug in their heels and tried to stop Cuba, too.
“Do we want to emulate the actions of nations like Cuba and China? Do we want the Florida Straits dotted with oil rigs?” asked Rep. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, Florida Democrat. “I think not.”
Sen. Bill Nelson, Florida Democrat, introduced legislation to prevent the Bush administration from renewing a maritime treaty that enables Cuba to conduct commercial activities in its half of the Straits — unless the administration gets an agreement that prevents Cuba from putting oil rigs close to Florida.
The treaty carves an exception to the 200-mile boundary of control the U.S. claims in its coastal waters. It was never ratified by the Senate, so it must be renewed every two years by the State Department. It expired in January.
If the U.S. abandons the treaty, Mr. Nelson reasons, the Straits of Florida would become disputed waters and multinational oil companies would be reluctant to invest the money needed to explore for oil there. His bill would further discourage drilling by authorizing the administration to punish executives of foreign oil companies that continue to drill off the northern coast of Cuba by denying them visas.
“So far, there have been no significant finds of commercially viable oil. Yet some members of Congress now are citing Cuba’s plans to drill close to Florida as justification for their proposal to allow U.S. oil companies to drill 20 miles off Florida’s Gulf coast,” he said.
Still, Mr. Nelson concedes that drilling proponents are making headway as the public fumes over record high fuel prices. “With several drilling proposals pending before Congress, our state’s unique environment and tourism-driven economy are in more jeopardy now than ever before,” he said.
Mr. Nelson on Monday renewed his vow to stop any drilling legislation that goes further than the Senate bill. A House bill would allow far more aggressive drilling in the outer continental shelf off Florida and elsewhere in the Gulf, if state legislatures vote to permit it. But it also would permit the Florida Legislature to ban drilling up to 100 miles offshore — a provision widely supported by Florida’s congressional delegation.

Victory on Hwy 46!

Posted on by

The Bulverde City Council didn’t buy into TxDOT’s bullying and rejected their pass through finance agreement to expand Hwy 46 to a gigantic 6 lane truck route! Not even Loop 1604 or Hwy 281 in Comal County have 6 lanes! TxDOT would not agree to ANY of the concessions Bulverde was asking for, all very reasonable, like paring it down to 4 lanes, taking out the toll clause, removing the truck turnarounds, considering the addition of an interchange at 281 in the project, etc.

Greg Malatek of TxDOT wasn’t willing to put anything in writing, refused to remove the toll clause, made threats like “this is your last chance,” and kept telling them it’s TxDOT that will decide the size, scope, and engineering of the project, period. So Bulverde said, “no deal.” In other words, it’s the same ol’ song from TxDOT: “do it our way, or you don’t get your improvements.” The residents and duly elected officials representing their constituents can go jump in Canyon Lake as far as TxDOT is concerned. Time to rein in the TxDOT dictatorship, and clean house in Austin Nov 7, starting with the head of this snake…Governor Perry who appoints this power-hungry, callous, and bossy Transportation Commission!

The Bulverde City Council is in good company…see what TxDOT is trying to pull over in El Paso here.

Bulverde turns down Texas 46 expansion plans

By Jessica Sanders
The Herald-Zeitung
July 26, 2006

Texas 46 expansions will not include the city of Bulverde.

Bulverde City Council members voted 3-1 against a plan that would allow the Texas Department of Transportation to expand Texas 46 through Bulverde. Councilwoman Pam Cole voted in favor of the project, and Councilman Mark Mobley was absent.

Councilwoman Cindy Cross said she was worried that a larger road would invite more traffic, and possibly allow Texas 46 to become a hazardous cargo route past San Antonio.

“I’m not ready to commit the citizen’s money to this project,” she said. “There are just too many unknowns.”

Mayor Sarah Stevick said the project would require the city to pay for right-of-way acquisition, at a price of about $790,000 over seven years.This would have increased taxes by about 2.5 cents, she said.

Stevick said that, during a July 6 informational meeting, council asked TxDOT for changes to their original plan. They suggested adjustment to the amount of right-of-way requested. They also wanted two truck turnarounds removed and to have the road striped for four lanes instead of six.

TxDOT area engineer Greg Malatek said that, while changes are possible, he could make no guarantees.

“We would not make six lanes because we want to pave the whole world,” he said. “We look at safety first and if our studies and traffic engineers feel that making six lanes is safer, that’s what we’ll do.”

Resident Elizabeth Morris said the highway runs past her property, and she has only noticed heavy traffic during a few hours in the morning and afternoon. Otherwise, traffic consists of construction vehicles and boaters headed to Canyon Lake.

“After 9 p.m. there’s nobody on the road,” she said. “I think if we make this six lanes, eventually it will become a route for San Antonio truck traffic. I did not move out here to have something bigger than 1604 in my backyard.”

The project to widen the highway has already been approved in New Braunfels and Comal County. Because the plan was rejected, the road will not be improved past the intersection of Sun Valley Drive and Highway 46.

Resident Dick McCaleb said he was concerned that the only places where there is a consistent traffic problem is in front of the area schools. To create a huge road for such a specific area, he said, would ruin the feeling of the town.

“The master plan talks about maintaining a Hill Country feel,” he said. “If we drop a six-lane road in Bulverde, it’s not going to have that appeal.”

However, Bulverde Police Chief Royce Goodson said the traffic problem is more widespread than some residents think. He said there have been 159 accidents on Highway 46 in the last 18 months.

“I’ve been on a scene several times where there’s one accident and then two and three more, like a chain reaction,” he said. “It is a problem and I do feel that if we had four lanes it would be less of a problem.”

Council asked Malatek if TxDOT would fund smaller scale improvements instead, such as the addition of turning lanes. He said that when a city agrees to allow TxDOT to work in an area, the work will be done by TxDOT’s standards and designs will be chosen by the department.

City Administrator John Hobson said he realized that a large road would change the town, but traffic and car accidents will also disrupt small town life.

“There is no doubt that there is a problem on Highway 46, and no doubt that we want to keep the rural feel,” he said. “It’s a difficult balance.”

States embrace the most expensive option: tolls to get their BIG FAT cash pay offs

Posted on by

Link to article here.

It’s not hard to see why government salivates at tolls since it means it’s the most expensive, least efficient means to grow government and fleece the taxpayer. The question is, what are the taxpayers going to do about it? Are we going to allow FAT CAT politicians getting their campaign coffers filled by the highway lobby to sell off America for some foreign money? Our web site is filled with articles about the dangers of America’s addiction to foreign money (read just one here) and how they’ve been collecting so much tax for highways they had money to waste on over 6,000 earmarks in last year’s pork-filled highway bill (read about it here). Think tanks and politicians say get on board the money train, but the grassroots are saing NO WAY! Time for a taxpayer revolt…get ready to clean house in November!
The talking points are always the same, “cash-strapped states turn to tolls to raise revenue for roads.” How about we do a little research on how many of the cash-strapped states had surpluses this year alone? Texas is one of them. With an $8.2 billion surplus (and that figure is rising exponentially), that’s hardly “cash-strapped.”

How ’bout the media do some actual reporting and not just regurgitate press release talking points from the money machine? In Texas alone, their state gas tax revenue has outpaced populationand inflation by more than three times in the last 20 years. So claim after claim in this article is FALSE! Now they’ve got Peter Samuel (father of toll roads, publisher of Toll Road News) repeating Ric Williamson’s talking point, “It’s toll roads or no roads.” And FYI to the reporter, the Austin Toll Party did unseat tollers and so have we. What TxDOT and our federal government are promoting is no “polite form of highway robbery,” it’s tantamount to criminal waste a fraud! Do your homework and report the FACTS instead of being lazy and calling facts a claim.

Cash-strapped states embrace toll roads

As highway funds dwindle, South Carolina eyes revenues from I-95 tolls. Indiana and Texas lease roads to firms.

By Patrik Jonsson | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor

June 7, 2006 issue

ATLANTA – America has a freeway problem.

It needs to spend an extra $118.9 billion – above and beyond current state and federal highway funding – to upgrade its roads and bridges through 2022, the Federal Highway Administration estimates. But motorists, already distraught over rising fuel prices, don’t want to foot the bill with higher gasoline taxes. So politicians from Oregon to South Carolina are reviving an old solution: the toll road.

Once seen as harbors of patronage, turnpikes are seeing a roadway renaissance. New technology that allows drivers to buzz through booths at a full clip is changing how Americans perceive their motoring experience, and revealing creative – and profitable – ways to build and maintain roads. Critics say the trend threatens to wreck the egalitarian spirit of highway travel in America by creating a form of travel tiered by wealth.

“There’s clearly a trend for states to look at [tolls] and there’s a lot of money on the table,” says Matt Sundeen, a policy analyst with the National Conference of State Legislatures in Denver. “It’s very alluring, because a lot of states have enormous highway budget shortfalls.”

Politicians are scrambling for new highway funding options because traditional ones are dwindling. Gas taxes raised per mile of interstate highway, for example, have fallen by about half since the 1960s, after accounting for inflation, says the Reason Foundation, a libertarian think tank in Los Angeles. “We have a shortfall between the capacity that’s needed and money that we have to build it,” says Geoffrey Segal, the group’s government reform director.

For many Americans, toll roads, especially with the advent of zip-through lanes, are increasingly appealing – if it eases their morning commute. Sixty percent of Californians said recently they favor toll roads over freeways if they save time, according to Lake Research Partners, a Washington, D.C., market research firm.

As a result, states are making bold moves. South Carolina has petitioned the federal government to turn its swath of I-95 into a toll road. The new I-25 high-speed toll lanes opened last week in Denver. Oregon is considering eliminating its gas tax in favor of making motorists pay for road usage per mile – with the help of toll transponders linked to a GPS system. Atlanta is mulling putting truck tolls on I-285, its crammed perimeter road.

Moreover, states are increasingly looking at an option already popular in Europe and Australia: leasing to a company the right to collect tolls on roads that it maintains. Illinois last week signed legislation that would allow such public-private partnerships. New Jersey is considering leasing out the New Jersey Turnpike. Texas has gone one better, partnering with Spain’s Cintra to build a new highway – the $6 billion, 316-mile Trans-Texas Corridor 35 – expected to open in 2014.

States woke up to the possibility of leasing existing toll roads to private management firms when a partnership of Cintra and Australia’s Macquarie Infrastructure Group agreed to pay $3.85 billion to Indiana for the 157-mile Indiana Toll Road, a year after the same group paid $1.8 billion for the eight-mile-long Chicago Skyway. Some $25 billion worth of public-private toll ventures are under way in at least six states, says the Reason Foundation.

“Right now, Americans are looking at toll roads – or no roads,” says Peter Samuel, editor of Tollroads News, an online newsletter. Yet many projects face “popular suspicion.”

Some critics complain that no-compete clauses in toll deals often include measures to lower speed limits on parallel free roads to drive traffic to the toll road – a polite form of highway robbery, they say.

“When government starts talking about raising tolls, putting in new tolls or selling off tollways, it creates a buzz [among motorists] and it’s certainly not a happy buzz,” says Eric Skrum, a spokesman for the National Motorists Association in Waunakee, Wis.

Protest has bubbled over in some states. Only one Democratic legislator in GOP-dominated Indiana voted for the toll road deal, as complaints rose about selling rights to the road to a foreign concern. In Austin, Texas, activists cobbled together the “Toll Party” to fight new toll roads there. The group claims to have unseated the pro-toll mayor of an Austin suburb.

Toll hogs: World’s largest toll operators hungry for U.S. market

Posted on by

Direct link to part of the second article here. The rest only available through subscription.

Our politicians are drinking the Kool-Aid, folks! Time to send a message Nov 7 nationwide…American infrastructure is NOT for sale! The best quote of a companion article:

“This is just crony capitalism. There’s no way a private entity can run the toll road more cheaply than a public entity…they’ve (private firms) got to make a profit,” Grant Smith, Citizens Action Coalition.

Toll hogs: World’s largest toll operators hungry for U.S. market
By David Tanner
Landline Magazine, for Independent Truckers
July issue

The dinner bell is ringing and private companies are headed to the trough.

If you haven’t heard by now, the main course is America’s infrastructure.

Gracious hosts have already included Illinois and Indiana, whose governors leased toll roads to private investors for up-front cash, cash to make up for growing gaps in their road budgets.

And why wouldn’t the states be gracious hosts, with the Bush administration paving the way in August 2005 with the federal highway funding legislation known as SAFETEA-LU?

And in May of this year, Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta, in a plan to take pressure off congested highways, called for private investors to take more interest in alternate routes, toll routes, airports and railways.

“Private capital will give those communities willing to embrace it an opportunity to augment public funds in order to complete critical transit and highway projects,” Mineta said in a press release. “We will never succeed in making today’s traffic a thing of the past without the involvement of this nation’s private sector.”

The toll hogs are coming to the trough and they are amassing huge portfolios while accepting the invitation to seats at the dinner table.

The recent private leases of the Chicago Skyway and the Indiana Toll Road – both to Spanish-Australian consortium Cintra-Macquarie – now look like they could just be the appetizer course.

During the bidding process and legislative action in Indiana that paved the way for Cintra-Macquarie to collect tolls for the next 75 years on the 157-mile Indiana Toll Road, another important business deal was brewing in Europe that soon could impact things to come in North America.

The deal, not widely publicized so far in North America, could give a new private investor a spoon to dip into the great melting pot.

Merger would create mega toll company

Two large European infrastructure companies, Abertis of Spain and Autostrade of Italy, announced a planned merger April 23 that would create the world’s largest private toll-road operator.

The reason for the proposed merger: the U.S. infrastructure market, according to a posting on the Abertis Web site, abertis.com.

“The objective is to set up a large European infrastructures operator with the volume and critical mass necessary for tackling operations in strategic markets such as the USA, Latin America and Asia,” Abertis officials stated on the site.

As of press time, Autostrade shareholders were scheduled to vote on the merger June 30. If approved, the merged company will operate under the Abertis name and be based in Barcelona.

In the event of the merger, the new Abertis would have a market capitalization of $30 billion U.S., with an annual revenue of $6 billion, according to the Wall Street Journal.

The merged Abertis would operate 4,130 miles of toll roads in Spain, Italy, France, the United Kingdom and several other countries. The company would also employ more than 20,000 people in 16 countries.

Part of Abertis’ portfolio is paid parking spaces. A subsidiary called Saba manages 91,400 parking spaces in Europe, South America and Africa.

The Italian government is not happy with the announced Abertis-Autostrade merger, according to that country’s top newspapers.

Italian infrastructure minister Antonio Di Pietro told the Italian media that he opposed the merger because it appeared to be an Abertis takeover of the Italian company. But Autostrade shareholders seemed to favor the merger even before the vote in late June, according to BBC News.

Autostrade shareholders bumped a board executive, Vito Gamberale, to a powerless position for reportedly opposing the merger, BBC News reported.

Skyway was first domino to fall

The proposed Abertis-Autostrade partnership, much like the group that’s already operating in North America – Cintra-Macquarie – has every intention of making a profit in the U.S. infrastructure market.

The merged Abertis, according to Forbes, will have a projected cash flow of $19.8 billion by 2014.

Even before the announcement of the merger, Abertis and Autostrade were actively seeking new toll roads to invest in.

Together, and with eyes set on the U.S. market, the new Abertis could well become a major stakeholder in state road building and tolling.

Cintra-Macquarie has led the way as the first foreign consortium to buy into the infrastructure buffet with a $1.83 billion lease of the Chicago Skyway that will last 99 years.

Tolls on the Skyway are expected to increase with the rate of inflation.

That has not been the case so far in Indiana.

Cintra-Macquarie will raise truck tolls on the Indiana Toll Road from $14.85 to $32 by 2010.

State lawmakers saw an increase as being inevitable, so they struck a deal with the Spanish/Australian consortium to phase in the increases instead of allowing the company to take it all in one mouthful.

Macquarie, with roots in the Australian banking industry, promises big returns for its investors, particularly once the U.S. market opens up to more privatization.

Goldman, Sachs & Co. officials in May told a House transportation panel that the U.S. infrastructure market could open up $50 billion to private investors.

Waiter, there’s a fly in the soup

But there’s a stigma attached to being a “foreign” investor in the U.S., despite the fact that numerous U.S. entities and about 80 percent of the country’s port terminals already operate under foreign leadership.

Macquarie may soon list itself as a U.S. company to shed the stigma attached to “foreign” investment in U.S. infrastructure, according to The Australian newspaper.

And, it remains to be seen how easy it will be the lease infrastructure state-by-state. For example, a group of Indiana residents decided they didn’t want to see U.S. infrastructure being leased, so they filed a lawsuit to challenge the constitutionality of Gov. Daniels’ “Major Moves” transportation plan and the lease of the Indiana Toll Road to Cintra-Macquarie.

That lawsuit had made it to the Indiana Supreme Court at press time.
_____________________
States ring the bell for the toll trough
By David Tanner
Land Line Magazine
Owner-Operator Independent Drivers (Truckers) Association
July 2006

A possible $15 billion privatization deal is in the works for 274 miles of the Illinois Tollway System.

Virginia is planning a $13 billion renovation to add lanes to the 325-mile Interstate 81, and is also planning to lease the Pocahontas Parkway for 99 years to Transurban from Australia for $525 million. The state has already leased the Dulles Greenway to Macquarie Infrastructure Group of Australia.

The Trans-Texas Corridor will require private investment to build and/or expand Interstate 35 and Interstate 69 to bolster a NAFTA corridor.

South Carolina applied in May for the right to toll the 200-mile Interstate 95, joining North Carolina, Virginia, Missouri and other states applying through a federal pilot program to toll existing interstates.

Private investment along the New York Thruway could help rebuild the Tappan Zee Bridge and others for $3 billion.

Lawmakers are proposing tolls on a 33-mile loop in Colorado around Colorado Springs called Springs Toll Road.

Arizona’s first ever toll road could include private investment opportunities in the Casa Grande area.

The South Bay Expressway, a 10-mile toll loop in San Diego, is being built with private dollars by Macquarie Infrastructure Group.

A bill nearing passage in Louisiana would allow the formation of public-private partnerships to build toll roads and bridges. A Nevada lawmaker is touting a similar bill.

Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell has praised the lease deals in Illinois and Indiana and said public-private partnerships would help the state’s cash flow for roads.

A New Jersey lawmaker recently withdrew a bill that would have privately leased 49 percent of the interest in the 148-mile New Jersey Turnpike and Garden State Parkway.

Jaime Castillo: Bexar politicians say toll roads shouldn't be the only option

Posted on by

Link to article here.
Jeff Wentworth’s “survey” shows that 77% of his consituents don’t want a 50 cent gas tax increase. Earlier this year, he admitted that 50 cent figure was made-up. The Transportation Commission tries to claim it’s a $1 a gallon increase needed, but even Wentworth recognized that figure was unsubstantiated and way too high. So instead of calculate the REAL figure needed, which is more accurately a 5-8 cent increase, he picked a scare tactic figure which, of course, his constituents recognized as overkill and soundly rejected!

The MPO in Austin found that all of their highway improvements (and they need improvements on EVERY highway but one) could be funded with a modest 1-2 gas tax increase. According to TxDOT’s claimed $8 billion funding gap for San Antonio, a 1-3 cent gas tax hike with today’s population would cover our needs (and that’s if you agree with what TxDOT calls “needs” and agree with the price of these projects. Remember toll roads cost 40-100% more to build and maintain than free roads). Dallas and Houston are likely similar figures, so a 5-8 cent increase would be more than enough statewide.

Perry won’t consider a gas tax increase because then he couldn’t enact his diabolical plan to heist our existing FREEways and turn them into money generating toll cash cow machines, emptying our wallets in order to grow the size of government while holding Texas motorists hostage to go to work, school, and shop! Perry’s failed to rein in spending, he’s squandered surplus after surplus, has failed to cut the waste from TxDOT and other bureaucracies, he’s increased the size of government through these mini-TxDOT’s, the RMAs, and he’s sold out to the highway lobby and foreign companies so he can lease out Texas to the highest bidder! Perry had no problem raising a whole NEW tax on businesses, the margins tax (HB 3), so to say our politicians have no political will to raise the gas tax is a JOKE! They have no problem raising taxes, they just DID when there was an $8.2 billion surplus!

Read the article below and you’ll understand more clearly how we need to fix what’s broken. Time to clean house in Austin. They no longer represent us!

Bexar politicians say toll roads shouldn’t be the only option
By Jaime Castillo
San Antonio Express-News
07/21/2006
They seem like odd questions in a so-called red state, but has Lyle Larson become the rare fiscal conservative in the Republican Party? Or is state Sen. Jeff Wentworth the uncommon Republican willing to buck the party line?

The state’s GOP leadership, from Gov. Rick Perry to Texas Transportation Commission Chairman Ric Williamson, is convinced that building toll roads is the only way to meet Texas’ highway needs of the future.

Larson, the Bexar County commissioner who has refused two pay increases since joining Commissioners Court in 1997, has a different idea: return to that seemingly forgotten Republican principle of reining in spending.

As he sees it, the state Legislature has created a self-fulfilling highway crisis by continually robbing the state highway fund for purposes other than road construction and maintenance.

From fiscal year 1986 to 2005, nearly $8.7 billion, or $10.6 billion in 2004 dollars, of the fund was spent on non-highway items, including state historical and arts commissions, parking lots and roads at state prisons and the Department of Public Safety.

Compare that to the projected $8 billion shortfall over the next 25 years for new highway lanes and bus service in San Antonio, and Larson can’t help but wonder: “If we just instilled some discipline in our state budget, we wouldn’t need a lot of these toll roads.”

Both, said Wentworth, who was a county commissioner in the 1980s.

“The charge is made that we began allowing funds to be siphoned off from the highway fund,” he said. “It’s absolutely true.”

But Wentworth, whose six-county district includes the northern Bexar County area slated for toll projects along Loop 1604 and U.S. 281, said politics has reduced the available solutions for lawmakers.

Earlier this year, the senator’s office received 16,000 responses to a highway funding survey.

Seventy-seven percent said they don’t want gas taxes raised up to 50 cents a gallon, and 54 percent said they don’t want to use toll roads to fund more highway construction.

“The message is: ‘I’m a Texan, and I’m entitled to the best roads, the best schools, the safest streets and the best parks,'” Wentworth said. “And then they say, ‘Oh, and while I’ve got you on the phone, senator, I don’t want you to raise any taxes.'”

Wentworth said it doesn’t help that state leaders like Perry won’t even consider options other than toll roads, like raising the gas tax, which has been stuck at 20 cents since 1991.

“I think he’s been co-opted by the drum beat of no new taxes,” Wentworth said of the governor. “Unfortunately, there’s some people in my party who think that’s the only requisite to being a Republican.”

Perry spokeswoman Kathy Walt said the governor remains firmly against increasing the gas tax, particularly as prices approach $3 a gallon at the pump. And a more frugal approach to the state’s highway fund is welcomed but won’t address all of the state’s needs.

Maybe. But it sure would be easier to swallow if it at least looked like state leaders hadn’t unilaterally decided that toll roads are the only option.

Perry in a free fall…approval rating fell 20 points in ONE MONTH!

Posted on by

Link to article here.

Perry approval takes big drop in stations’ poll
Weak showing in Harris County blamed on anger over 2 tax issues
By R.G. RATCLIFFE
Houston Chronicle
July 21, 2006
AUSTIN – A new poll conducted for a pair of Texas television stations has found Gov. Rick Perry’s job approval rating declining and nowhere more than in Harris County.

The county has become a particular weak spot in the governor’s re-election campaign, largely because of conservative anger over his inability to pass property tax appraisal caps and for adopting a business tax to pay for property tax cuts.

The governor’s staff fended off an effort at the state Republican convention in June to pass a resolution against the business tax. Most of the support for the resolution came from Senate District 7, the home turf of KSEV radio talk show host Dan Patrick, who is a heavy favorite to represent the district in the state Senate next year.

Perry’s drop in job approval occurred in a Survey USA poll conducted for KEYE-TV in Austin and WOAI-TV in San Antonio. The survey was distributed to reporters Friday by the campaign of independent gubernatorial candidate Comptroller Carole Keeton Strayhorn.

The poll found Perry’s approval and disapproval rating at a statistical tie, with 47 percent approving of the job he is doing as governor and 48 percent disapproving.

That’s a drop from the June poll when Perry’s approval rating was 51 percent positive and 45 percent negative.

But that June poll also was done shortly after Perry had saturated the state with television advertising touting that the average Texas homeowner will receive a $2,000 property tax cut under legislation passed in a special session he had called.

The June poll found 55 percent of those surveyed in Harris County approved of Perry’s job as governor. The July poll found that number had declined to 35 percent approving and 65 percent disapproving.

The poll is conducted by automated calls to randomly selected homes and is more indicative of adult residents of Texas than of likely voters.

Perry spokesman Robert Black dismissed the Survey USA report as “bogus,” claiming its methodology could not be trusted.

“It would be foolhardy to pay attention to any poll in July and particularly any poll like Survey USA that is not scientific and certainly not representative of Texas,” Black said.

However, Patrick said he has warned Perry and his chief of staff, Deirdre Delisi, that anti-Republican sentiment is running high in Harris County among conservatives.

Patrick said they are unhappy with state Republicans for not passing a property tax cap and for approving a new business tax when property tax cuts could have been paid for by the state’s budget surplus. He said conservatives are unhappy with the national Republicans for not addressing immigration issues.

“I have not gotten a positive call about the Republican Party” in the past six to eight weeks, Patrick said.

Patrick, the Republican nominee in Senate District 7, faces Democrat F. Michael Kubosh in the general election.

Patrick said he also has been “amazed” at how many callers to his show have said they plan to vote for independent gubernatorial candidate Kinky Friedman. Patrick said he reminds his listeners that Friedman has fought against executions of convicted murders and has supported gay marriage.

“These people who say they support Kinky may not vote,” Patrick said.

Perry’s re-election is being challenged by Friedman, Strayhorn, Democrat Chris Bell and Libertarian James Werner.

Corridor opposition makes New York Times!

Posted on by

Link to New York Times article here.

You bet our opposition spells trouble for the Governor! If he hasn’t woken-up yet, he never will. He’s heard from tens of thousands of Texans on this issue as well as on urban toll roads, and he STUBBORNLY REFUSES TO LISTEN. It’s time for him to go! Strayhorn is just the right person to do it. See why we endorse her here.

Texans who oppose corridor may spell trouble for Governor
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
New York Times
July 23, 2006

Farmers and landowners across Texas are angry about a proposed 600-mile superhighway, and that could pose a problem for Gov. Rick Perry as he runs for re-election.Mr. Perry, a Republican, proposed the project, the Trans Texas Corridor, in 2002, envisioning a combined toll road and rail system that would whisk traffic from the Oklahoma line to the border with Mexico.That would be the first link in a 4,000-mile, $184 billion transportation network. The corridors would have up to six lanes for cars and four for trucks, railroads, energy pipelines, utility lines and broadband cables.The route has not been drawn up, but many farmers and landowners would lose property to the state. Construction could begin by 2010.

The opposition comes in several forms: Some see it as an assault on private property rights; some object to putting the project in foreign hands (the state accepted a proposal by a United States and Spanish consortium to build and operate it); and some dislike that part of a development contract with the consortium, Cintra-Zachry, is secret.

Of Mr. Perry’s major opponents — Chris Bell, a Democrat, and Carole Keeton Strayhorn and Kinky Friedman, independents — Ms. Strayhor stirs the most fury. She calls the plan the “Trans Texas Catastrophe” and a “land grab” of historic proportions.

Cintra-Zachry proposes paying $7.2 billion to build the first segments. For that, it would get to operate them and collect tolls for years.

“The governor recognizes the concerns that rural Texans have,” Robert Black, Mr. Perry’s spokesman, said. “But he also believes that you have people out there who are spreading bad information.”

Supporters say the corridors are needed to handle an expected boom in the flow of goods to and from Mexico and in Texas’s population. The state will own the land and will oversee toll amounts, Mr. Black said.

Anger percolated at a recent public hearing in Hillsboro.

Janet Walters said she believed that Mr. Perry would eventually see that the corridor was a critical campaign issue. “I don’t think Rick Perry will back off until he feels like, ‘This is going to cost me the election,’ ” Ms. Walters said. “Then he’ll back off.”

Letter to Kinky from one of our supporters

Posted on by

To:  Mr. Kinky Friedman

With regard to your application to me for the position of Governor of the state of Texas, I must sadly decline your application for employment.  When I find myself in the position of turning down an applicant, I feel it a kind and friendly gesture to give that person a little advice and information as to why I choose not to hire him.

Such information follows:

First, we had an appointment at 11888 Starcrest on Wednesday at 11:30 AM as per the news media.  I arrived at this time in an effort to speak with you and you were late.  You did not arrive until approximately 11:50 AM and kept me and several hundred other perspective employers waiting.  I am busy and my time is valuable.  As someone you are seeking employment opportunities from, I do not think it is wise to “keep the boss waiting”.  In addition I did not receive any call or notice from your subordinates that your were running late.  Once you did arrive, you did not seem to be in a hurry nor did you express and concern about being late.

Be that as it may, let me move on to the next subject.

I was there waiting for you and you did not talk to me.  While you did speak, you spoke at me and did not take questions and concerns from the 200 or so perspective employers.  As a perspective employer, you did not express any concern to have a dialogue.  I had questions for you which were relevant for the other perspective employers to hear also.

You also made a tremendous mistake.  You spoke about a supposed 8 billion surplus which the state of Texas has which you felt should be given back to the tax payers.  That’s all very well and nice to say but your number was slightly off.  The actual number for the amount of the surplus is in excess of 600 billion dollars.  If you wish to apply for the position of representing me and my fellow Texans I expect you to know the relevant information and not to make such monumental mistakes as this.  Perhaps you are not aware of this surplus.  If not.. I suggest you visit the state comptrollers office and obtain a free copy of the Texas Comprehensive Annual Financial Report and you will be able to see where this 600 billion is to be found.  Perhaps MS. Strayhorn can help you!  If you have difficulties locating this information it will be helpful for you to start with a 1997 and 1998 copy of the report in that the format was changed after these dates.

Next you did not address the issue of the 8,000 miles of public roads that Rick Perry is attempting to give to Spain for a Texas profit of approximately 2 billion and a profit to Spain of approximately 150 billion.  Such an issue is relevant in your campaign, isn’t it?  It is certainly relevant to me.  And of course, once you discover the aforementioned 600 billion surplus, you then have to ask what the reason is for us giving our public property to a foreign government when we have the financial ability to build any number of new roads any where in Texas?  Kinda makes you wonder doesn’t it?

There is also the issue of Federal encroachment of my Constitutional rights which you did not address.

There is also the issue of the loss of our sovereignty being implemented every day by the Federal Government.

And lastly, I sincerely hope you understand that the governor of any state (especially Texas) has the complete legal authority to prohibit any kind of Federal encroachment (or federal employee) in the state as per the 9th and 10th amendments.  I am sure you understand that numerous Supreme Court rulings have confirmed this statement

I can go on and on but I feel as though you probably get the picture.

If you expect me or any other Texans to employ you in the capacity of Governor / Public Servant, you need to have a little more in depth and informed conversation with me.

Best wishes in your campaign,
Ted Baker
The Public & A Texan